Another of Sabine’s “whistle-blowers” revealed as violent paedophile

As if on cue, yesterday we learned that yet another “whistle-blower” with links to Sabine McNeill and Belinda McKenzie has been sentenced to a 10-year hospital direction order, having previously pleaded guilty to inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent, and to possessing an offensive weapon, along with 12 counts of sexually assaulting a girl under 14 in Liverpool in the 1970s.

Paul Hobson, prosecuting, said at lunchtime on December 5, 2016, Bellett took a kitchen knife to his local pharmacy in Garnant, near Ammanford.

He waited until he was alone with the pharmacist, Michael Irons, and then confronted him about what he believed was Mr Irons’ “culpability” in the over-prescription.

When he didn’t get the answers he wanted, he “lunged” at his victim and tried to stab him in the stomach. …

The court heard the pharmacist took evasive action, and Bellett’s knife went through his arm instead, causing heavy bleeding.

There was then a scuffle between the two men, and Bellett grabbed his victim’s head and tried to gouge his eyes. …

Bellett stayed in the shop, and called the police to tell them what he had done – adding that he would explain why when they arrived.

The court heard officers were soon on the scene, and Bellett said to them: “I could really do with a cup of tea. I know that is an unusual thing to say after stabbing someone.”

In his subsequent interview he said the medical profession was over-prescribing him medication, and he took the knife to the chemist shop intending to cause the pharmacist a serious injury in order to draw attention to the issue because “a scratch would not have done any good”.

According to the Carmarthenshire Herald, Mr Bellett “stabbed Michael Irons so viciously the four inch knife went through his left arm and he had to be flown by air ambulance to Morriston Hospital”. Doctors estimate he lost more than a pint of blood. Mr Irons stated in his victim impact statement that he was so horrified by the unprovoked attack that he found it “almost unbearable” to return to the pharmacy where it had occurred.

Mr Bellett also admitted to having sexually molested a six-year-old girl in the 1970s, when he was in his 20s. In her victim impact statement, the girl, now a mother, described her reluctance to hug her own children, which she attributes to the trauma of having been molested by Mr Bellett.

The psychiatrist who has been treating Mr Bellett for the past year said that his patient has a delusional disorder, from which he was suffering at the time of the attack.

“However, he was aware of his actions, and he planned the assault—it was not a crazed attack”, he said.

The Association of McKenzie Friends connection

When we reported Mr Bellett’s arrest last year, a commenter pointed out that Mr Bellett had been treasurer to the Association of McKenzie Friends as recently as 2012: In last year’s article in the South Wales Guardian, which reported Mr Bellett’s arrest, Sabine commented,

I have known Peter Bellett for many years, since he came to meetings at the House of Commons that I organised.

You may want to see Peter’s action in the light of his life’s experiences, and not just as an isolated incident, just as the pharmacist and the Mayor are portrayed here in the light of their professional activities.

Mind the Gaps: between short- and long-term thinking, the memory of social media and the quick pace of mainstream media!…

Shockingly, she writes, “We would NOT be in this position today, had all the relevant authorities acted as they should have… Where does the blame lie? Who’s responsible when victims of white collar crimes don’t get justice??? What has happened so that speaking the truth has become a crime?”

In other words, she appears to believe that Mr Bellett was not responsible for nearly murdering Mr Irons—it was all the fault of the “relevant authorities” who failed to act “as they should have”.

We wonder what excuse she will invent to let Mr Bellett off the hook for having sexually assaulted a six-year-old girl? Or perhaps she won’t bother trying to excuse him. After all, he fits right in with the growing collection of convicted paedophiles and violent criminals on Sabine and Belinda’s roster of friends.

When I got wind of this I read Bellett’s life story on his webpage. Has a criminal history and said he’d turned his life around. After years of hanging out with (according to him) drug dealers and illegal arms traders he worked as a chef and in finance, where most people were corrupt but not him. Get’s on your nerves when that happens doesn’t it. He claims to have tried to blow the whistle on financial institutions and criminal individuals but nobody would do anything about it.

He became ill and blames, not just one doctor, for (according to him) incorrectly prescribing medication, but all the doctors and nurses involved and he says his medical records were altered. Nobody would do anything about that either.

For me this reinforces the importance of reporting these nut jobs to the police. Some of them are plain dangerous.

Sabine is absolutely right to hold others responsible for this mentally ill man’s actions. I blame all those who encouraged him to think in this paranoid fashion and who didn’t talk him into an earlier psychiatric consultation. Shame on all of you in the McKenzie Friends who knew he was like this and did nothing. Some of you must have known his history and that he was capable of violence.

Why oh why, does Sabine, Belinda, Neelu & the rest of their crew always try to find a way to justify these dregs of society! Where do they come across them in the first, do they study court lists marking people’s names who they think, “ah yes, this one will be controversial enough to get us noticed”.

As if on cue Matthew Parris writes a scathing article on “Nick” in the Sunday Times and voices what many of us are thinking:
“And a final cautionary word. I shall phrase this delicately because I’m very clear that most paedophile-hunters are not latent paedophiles, most gay-baiters are not suppressing homosexual tendencies, and most of those impelled to expose satanic practices are not strangely drawn to the occult.

But some are. Few gay men will not have heard with a knowing sigh the news this week that young Ethan Stables, convicted of planning to attack a gay pride event in Cumbria with machetes, was a tortured bisexual. The most aggressive campaigners on any sex-related issue should be taken at face value and in good faith — but with just a pinch of caution.”

[“But there will always be Nicks. The evil they can do is at least in part the product of our readiness to credit. Were the British — were ordinary men and women — really gripped by a wave of madness in which it became possible to believe the rantings of a self-serving fantasist?”

No, Matthew, it’s not “ordinary men and women” who get gripped by a wave of madness, but people of your very class of media bods and tribal politicians whose hearts skip a beat at the sight of a charismatic charlatan (especially if perhaps they themselves lack that level of charisma but nevertheless love or even crave attention and ratings).
That charlatan is then embraced as the next pet project and subsequently shown off by your colleagues to the ordinary men and women – perhaps even to police – until such time they’re exposed as the fantasists or charlatans they truly are, by other colleagues within your industry (often tipped off by ordinary men and women), and that then becomes the next big story to jump on.
In the process, ordinary men and women – even police – may be convinced of one or another side of the story, but they’re not the ones gripped by any wave of madness: they are the ones presented with (and possibly taken in by) the wave of madness served up to them by (fame/ratings-hungry) journalists, presenters and other media bods riding the coattails of their charismatic attention-seeking subject.
If I remember correctly, fantasist Nick didn’t take his made-up stories straight to Scotland Yard, he took his story to journalists first, and those journalists then encouraged him (and possibly even arranged for him) to speak to police. For the media bods, having their lead formally taking things to the police added weight to the claims they published. I wouldn’t be surprised if, for the police investigating Nick’s claims, coverage of this new-found media darling’s spectacular stories contributed to their thinking of those stories as credible.
Perhaps that’s the sequence of events which culminated into a wave of madness in which it became possible to believe the rantings of a fantasist — a fantasist who might indeed have been self-serving, but also turned out to be way more than just self-serving: he served ambitious journalists, radio presenters, police big shots and MPs rather well, too (well, at least while it lasted). In fact, he still does now that he’s been found out to be a liar: that’s a whole new bandwagon to jump on (particularly for those who never jumped on the previous one).
There have been and will be other Nicks, some sicker or otherwise worse than others, others less harmful but still making for good stories, however made-up they are. Members of the public will be taken in by them, too,
Ordinary men and women will fall for those stories, even if they sound too crazy to be true. Why? Because people hungrier and thirstier than them, but with very serious faces and voices, will be serving them up as serious news.] – jojowiththeflow

Meanwhile, here’s what my favorite chew-toy Michael Salter was saying about “Nick” in January of 2017.
The context is an essay about how journalists in the modern age ought to approach “organized abuse” allegations and cases. Salter was delighted by Exaro, and disgusted by Aronovitch, naturally:

“A new media receptivity to organized abuse has
been countered by the remobilization of these discourses, particularly where “historical”
allegations of organized abuse by well-known men have proved difficult to substantiate.
For instance, in 2014, online news site Exaro began publicizing a number of stories based
on the statements of a man known pseudonymously as “Nick,” who described organized
abuse by his stepfather and a group of high-profile men in childhood (Conrad, Watts, &
Varley-Winter, 2014). Most explosively, Nick described witnessing three murders in the
course of his abuse. The stories prompted police to contact Exaro in order to interview
Nick about his allegations (Conrad & Watts, 2014), whereupon police established a
dedicated task force (dubbed Operation Midland) to investigate them further. The general
thrust of Nick’s allegations was supported by two other alleged male victims (Wood, 2015),
as well as British woman Esther Baker (who has waved her right to anonymity) (Hencke
& Watts, 2015). There are criminal proceedings regarding Baker’s allegations at the time
of this writing.
The response of the mass media was mixed. Exaro’s exclusive stories were widely
covered by national and international press and played an important role in the
background of the establishment of the national abuse inquiry. Early commentary from
well-known skeptics such as David Aaronivitch described the allegations as a “classic
panic” in the style of previous abuse controversies (Aaronovitch, 2014). Yet the tone of
most press reporting was restrained and factual. Although journalists were skeptical
about the murder claims in particular (O’Neill, 2016), police had publicly described Nick’s
allegations as “credible and true” (BBC News, 2014). There was mounting criticism of
Exaro’s role in bringing these allegations to light, with one witness, “Darren,” pulling out
of a police investigation and complaining about Exaro’s conduct in encouraging him to
publicize his allegations, after journalists from the Telegraph identified him and
attempted to interview him at his house (O’Neill, 2015). While Darren maintained the truth
of his allegations, he blamed Exaro for the subsequent negative media attention, which
included details about his past that had not been in the public domain. There was public
criticism of Exaro’s involvement in publicizing Nick and Darren’s allegations and
facilitating their contact with police (O’Neill, 2015).
In early 2016, the police investigation into Nick’s allegations closed without laying any
charges. At the time, police emphasized that it was “not uncommon” for investigations to
end without charges when the evidence gathered did not meet a criminal threshold, and
that “officers found no evidence” that they were “knowingly misled” by Nick
(Metropolitan Police, 2016). This was an outcome described by the mass media as an
“embarrassment” to the police (Evans, 2016) and confirmation that the investigation was a
“witch-hunt” (Adams, 2016). Writing in the Sunday Times, O’Neill (2016) described Nick’s
allegations as a “hotchpotch of rumours” concocted from online “conspiracy theories.”
The clear implication of this coverage was that Nick’s allegations lacked prima facie
credibility and should never have been reported by Exaro or investigated by police,
alongside the implication that Nick confabulated his allegations. Well-known investigative
and evidentiary challenges to substantiating complaints of “historical” abuse, as
foregrounded by the police in their media statements, were thus reworked to support preexisting
narratives about institutional over-reactivity to sexual abuse allegations, and
characterizations of organized abuse complainants as fantasists and attention-seekers”.

– from “Organized Child Sexual Abuse in the Media” by Mickey Mouse, January 2017

There will always be people like Bill Maloney, Ben Fellows, Lou Collins, his Fay, and Sonia Poulton who really Milk these situations too. They have all gone very quiet, as they did with the Hollie Hoax.

Fear not FG, there is hope you will hear about some of those characters, and more, again soon. Not from them, I emphasise, but about them. Blue is such a pleasing colour for a light, especially when it’s flashing. 🙂

Indeed a good comment.
Exaro was a wonderful source for the red-tops and even the so-called mainstream outlets like BBC/Times etc as they lapped up the claims made.
I watched the atrocious Oz ’60 Minutes’ ( a down-market franchise version of the US show) which ‘revealed’ the tale of the cover-up of the UK ‘VIP Pedo’ ring with most of the ‘facts’ supplied by Exaro.
Alas one informant is now under a cloud having been exposed as falsely accusing an ex-MP known to us here and even more startling was the claim from a supposed chauffeur for the Australian High Commissioner who claimed he ferried on a regular basis in the Oz official Rolls Royce, children to VIP pedo parties at..where else: Dolphin Square.
When said chauffeur was exposed as a fill-in driver who worked for a total of 4 days while the regular driver was off -sick and would not have been allowed to use the car out of office hours this was ignored by the media.

It reminds me of the McCarthy trials. Feed something to the masses & hysteria becomes an issue. If we are getting fed this type of news by the media or people we get our news from, the public will eventually believe it, hence mob hysteria commences.

I’m aware of one UK citizen now living in Oz who contacted Exaro in the early days about his abuse. He says he was courted by Exaro for about 4 months as they persistently seemed to badger him for details such as did he ever visit the Elm Guest House etc and presented him with 6 names for comments on whether he knew them. When he couldn’t supply any good answers to their questions they simply dropped him and he never heard back from them.
He found this extremely disturbing and despite me advising him to contact IICSA and present his story he is now reluctant to ever talk of it again and simply wants to forget the entire business.
Having been a “victim” myself decades ago I am very aware of how many victims feel especially the fact that many blame themselves- survivor’s guilt which fortunately is a very real thing that is now addressed by professionals.
False victims do have a terrible debilitating effect upon genuine victims and the phonies (including their so-called advocates) can cause havoc in true victim’s lives.

My pal also worries that Exaro have all his details and a trail of endless emails. I’ve assured him that at least in that respect I’m pretty sure that info is either secured or has been destroyed.
But yet another little niggling aspect to send a true victim potty at times of low morale.

Stupidly enough, “Zed” has called his book “the power of great dreams, the fantasists guide to success”, see http://www.zedphoenix.co.uk …Ironic given what a failure he’s been at everything he’s ever tried to do!

I thought jojo’s comment was also a perfect counter-point to Dr Michael Salter’s ravings (below).
Everything that jojo was condemning is exactly what Salter thought was admirable, and the things about mainstream media ‘coverage’ that Salter decries are in fact the revelations of fact & truth about the situation.
Salter says: “The clear implication of this coverage was that Nick’s allegations lacked prima facie
credibility and should never have been reported by Exaro or investigated by police,
alongside the implication that Nick confabulated his allegations”.

Wake up, Doc! The clear facts of the matter ARE that Nick’s allegations lacked prima facie
credibility and should never have been reported by Exaro or investigated by police,
alongside the BLATANT REALITY that Nick confabulated his allegations.

Ghost of Sam, yes, I remember watching that 60 minutes programme in late summer of 2015 (at that stage I was still in ‘believer in VIP abuse network conspiracy” mode). I asked an Aussie mate at the time if he had seen it, his response was along the lines of “are you joking, mate? 60 minutes is tabloidy rubbish, I haven’t watched it in 20 years!”

He stopped taking the meds a few years ago but seems to have remained aggrieved at what he saw as an injustice. That’s what his story more or less says. He was afraid the doctors and others would do the same thing to someone else.

Absolutely. This is our position as well. Vigilante “paedo-hunters” seem to cause more harm than good, ranging from damaging reputations of the innocent through destroying months or years of careful police work, through physically harming or even killing their “suspects”—who may or may not be guilty.

I have a nuanced view on it, but in general share your scepticism of pretty much any form of vigilantism.

There was another case recently involving an RTE producer. Allegedly, he had travelled from Dublin to England to meet what he thought was a 14 year old girl. Actually, the girl didn’t exist, it was a fake profile set up by a ‘paedohunter’. The ‘paedohunters’ in this case seemingly did the correct thing and reported him to the cops, went through the proper channels and so on. The case is before the courts so I will be careful not to say anything about his guilt or innocence, but bear in mind travelling to procure a child for sexual offences is an offense (I forget the exact legal terminology) even if there was no child.

To be totally honest, I’m not sure if I’m entirely comfortable with the police using such methods. Are we saying “as a society” that we are comfortable with the police using such methods, but not when Joe Punter the Self-styled Peadohunter (*) does it?

Actually, I think I’m more comfortable with police doing it than with Joe Punter, as at least the police are restricted in their actions (at least theoretically) by the knowledge that if they muck it up, their case will collapse in court.

It’s true and nothing illustrates the sheer mendacity of The Establishment than the False Flag events involving so-called Godzilla who has rampaged through several cities now.
There is NO Godzilla: he’s played by well known Crisis Actor Skippy the Bush Kangaroo and as you can see from my exclusive photo the remarkable similarities between the two. Amazing that Chris Spivey hasn’t spotted this. The “Godzilla” attacks are used as a cover to drench major cities with Chem Trails.

I think they are appalling mainly because they seek attention.
The filming of their “busts” and putting videos up on Youtube or flogging them to the Daily Mail (and they do sell them) is very dodgy legally and seems to help no-one.

Police rarely publicize arrests in that way and the dangers of vigilantism or possible legal ramifications are dire.
I’ve pondered long and hard on these attempts to lure people into committing crimes. The FBI are notorious for grooming & encouraging would-be terrorists who are often very low level fantasists.
I feel there is going to be a shocking case eventually where a completely innocent person comes to grief in spectacular fashion due to vigilante action in this way. It’s hard enough for real police to work within the law.

There is probably a good case for luring and exposing would-be child abusers. Personally I’m puzzled that some older blokes must think they would be desirable to a 15 year old girl but ego is a complicated thing. And the fact they still fall for these stings after so much publicity really shows society can be naive.

Social media also shares blame: why is possible for a 40 year old man to enter a chat room and chat to a 13/14 year old child?. More evidence that the tech giants only play lip service to the law and are uncontrollable. If a man attended a teen disco and went around chatting to young teens there would be an outcry!

I think Social Media outlets where these offenders are able to contact youngsters and attempt to meet with them for illegal purposes should pay a penalty.

Nipping a crime in the bud is surely a very good thing and anything that prevents the life of a child or young teen getting involved in some seedy or criminal episode that may affect their life is a positive. But police should be given much more resources to do the job. It’s also inevitable that the police (even if they secretly encourage vigilantes) will get annoyed amateurs are on their patch.

These ‘peadohunters’ must be extremely good at “flattering” seemingly often intelligent blokes who then set out to screw up their life. That in itself is bizarre.
Shouldn’t they come under some sort of psychiatric scrutiny or police checks and so on?.

Professionals have to so why do these amateurs get away with it?. Police who work on child abuse cases often need to be transferred to other units after time because they find the work distressing but these amateurs seem to thrive on their successes. It’s yet another gray area in the law.

Have the police ever looked into the backgrounds of these amateurs? One of the most publicized hunter is a convicted arsonist who tried to burn down a school. I’m not going to accuse him of any further illegalities and even an arsonist ( I’m terrified of fire !) is entitled to get on with life and thrive but is this really a person who should be delving into complicated matters involving children?

Now that I think of it was a case in Jersey many years ago whereby a local eccentric was accused of being the notorious ‘Beast of Jersey’. Fortunately, the mob didn’t kill him, but he had to escape to a neighbouring island. The ‘Beast of Jersey’ turned out to be someone else entirely: